The Wilmingtonian., 1887-04-16

| GThr following paper was read by the Rev.
]. l.. Estlin of this city before the Minis
terial Association of the Reformed Episco-
pal Church at their recent meeting in Phil
| adelphia.
Many Of nnr readers are doubtless curious
as to the rdison d'etre Of the Reformed Epis-
| copol Chulch, aud will be interested to learn
among other facts brought to light in this
paper that the causes Of separation were
not based upon any demands Of dOctTinal
reformation, but only for liturgcal revision.
Another phase of Interest to students of
ecclesiastical history will be those passages
In this paper refereing to the d fiiculties ex-
peIienced by the Refnrmers in fastening
nbligatoriDess up III their on daintd priests in
erard to literal obedience to liturgical GUS
toms, for instance in following the order of
the rubric in morning and evening prayers.
Also as tho speaker illustrates, many of the
clergy of the Reformed Church appear to
ho.d that they have carte blanche as to the
orler of services.
The explanation, OF ou'se, is tina, having
once separated from the Protestant Episco-
pal Church upon litureical az cnntrasted
with spiritual doctrine an unconscious free
dom OF action is felt and carried by some of
the ministers Of the Reformed Episcopal
Church.
It is this feeling aud practice which thr
spes Ser strongly comhats in his paper,
claiming that such action by the clergy of
,hat church is inimical TO its success and
tends to bring it iuto disrepute among
chu,chmPu. Ed,
Mr.. + tin spoke as follows:
"a short II ne since received communi-
cation from Mr. w. U. Anthony OF New
burgh, N Y, chairman OF committee APP
pninteh at tho May Council of the synod Ut
New York and Philadelphia. The duty
assigned TO this committee is to d Iise plans
for extending the work of the Reformed
episcopal Church. In order to secure the
most practical suggestions, they have sent
out a circular IN which is asked number of
| questions, bearing upon the matter, and IT,
these questions both our clergy and laity
are invited TO submit whatevt ideas they
have that will help the committee in their
work. At our last meeting ynr selected me
| to present my own sujsct here to-day for
! our discussion. After thinking the matter
| aver it occurred to me that perhaps the
| most profitable subject to us as a church l
| could possibly select, wCuld he regarding
the wniship Of our church. Ii l were to
| write to that COMMITTEES, giving y hat be-
ieved to be necessary for extending our
work, | would sly that | believe we ought
% have a uniform service. Our church
ought to occupy larger place in the world.
Very little has been done toward organizing
new work in the last five or six years. Oat-
side of the generous GIFT for the noble en-
terprise ia West Philadelphia very little has
been accomplished. The are number Of
reasons for the slow and dormant condition
of our church, but one reason believe to be
the mongrel services that have provoked
unfavuTable comments from those who have
been accustomed to uniform service in the
Protestant Episcopal Church all their lives.
Indeed our church has been quite dlsap
poinUment to many because Of the preSump-
Gun Of ministers who htvs taken the liberty
10 dsturt and twist ths services Of our
church ont of their order. Oar progress has
been hindered, aud our growth has been
quite slow on this account. There IL no
Inference in our praye: buok, and therg
should be mono in the se wees. Satiricsl
aud sarcastic iuvr0tiyes have beeu prUVaktd
| against us because OF the lack of apprecia-
LiOp, aud the failure to conform with the
oIder for worship as land out in our morn
ing and evening prayer. There is no room
tor Iidicule on the part Of the most crtica
when our services are given in their entirety
and true order. No doubt we deserve
the unkud remarks passed upon us for our
inconsistency. A gentlem ,u told me some
time since that he attended a service of Que
Of our churches, aud found it to be very
much like the Methodist q ,urch. We have
been called MethodatE, PreSbyterians, Bap-
lists and even Dutch Rsturmers. Tho con.
test carried on in the Protestant Episcopal
Church for so many years was to secure IA
revision Of the prayer hook, 80 that certain
words of u Roman Significance might be
expunged. Ii You had secured he few
changes that you requested of the general
convention Of tho Protestant Episcopal
Church, while loyal ministers of that bod,
your consciences would have been satisfied
and yuu would have Continued to worship
according TO the grand old services of morn
ing and evening prayer. You were salts.
lied with the thirtR-ninO articles Of religion,
aud all you wanted was the eSpurgatinn Of
the PRAYER book to bring it into harmony
With those articles Of religion. The contest
was not tor dOctrn"l reformation, but for
| lturgical revision. Your efIrts to secure
pure liturgy have b,en blessed of God. H.,
has given You what you so long prayed for.
aud Tor winch you have made 50 many sac
rlfices We have claimed that ours is not a
new church, but the old church restored to
IT'S aucieut purity, aud reconstructed
On the evangelical prayer book of Edward
the Sixth. How have We shown Oul appre-
cidtion aud loyalty for our declarations Of
faitn, and our beautiful T1rms Of service?
| Have we been true 10 our SERVICES? Hay.
We sought from the inception of the Re-
form Ep scopal Church to get as near the
old church as possible, except lis errors? /
is true we have a great tnanY pamphlets
written in au ablo and clear style, by MANY
Of our prominent ministers explaining the
d ference between the Protestant Episcopal
aud the Refo. med Episcopal Church. But
what does all Ethls explanation amount to
wheu the spirit Of the sul ,ct treated in our
literature is wanting. People are more
| "a ilV tnnuht hv pYamrlc tha,, I,, ,,ran,,,.